Cricforum.com

Few sports fans are as keen to talk about records, classic matches, great players from the past etc as cricket buffs. This is where all such posts should be made. You will find an excellent library of cricket views, opinions and records here. Go ahead, be a classic cricket pundit. We take you seriously.

Posted this initially in the NZ-England Test thread, but it deserves its own thread.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From all my years of following cricket, I've found reasonably successful captains tend to fall in one of two categories.(Of course, finally you're only as good as the quality of your team, but assuming other things being same (quality of team, quality of opposition), the captaincy style then becomes relevant in getting it to deliver).

1) Personally highly ambitious and hungry for success. These guys lead by example, they demand a lot from their own selves, they hate losing - and this rubs off on the team. They might be brash, self-centered - but they wear their team jersey with great pride. Other players tend to raise their game, just cos the captain himself is so hungry (and demanding!).Examples: ------------Kevin Pietersen (was unfortunately sacked as captain after just 3 games)Saurav GangulySteve SmithMS DhoniVirat Kohli

2) The "man manager". These guys get along great with the rest of the team - they make effort to make everyone feel he's liked and belongs. As a result, they themselves end up being respected and generally likeable. They put emphasis on team effort, they're usually very disciplined because they want the rest to be too. They hate losing too (no one likes losing!), but their way of showing it is different. They're much quieter than Type-1, but not necessarily less effective. Examples:------------Rahul DravidGraeme SmithStephen FlemingFaf du PlessisMahela Jayawardene

Katto wrote:I would also put Ponting in the same category as Steve Smith, maybe Clarke too

all our recent captains have been bogans. Border was the last middle class. Mark Taylor a country boy. Everyone since = bogan.

I don't think England have ever appointed a chav as captain.

Flintoff?

But cricket in England is a private school game for the majority it has struggled to break some of the class barriers. Football hooligans and all that. But some progress is being made at school level.

Well said. A sport must not be seen as an elite sport. in that sense, football has been far more popular than cricket in England. Unlike India and Australia, where cricket is a mass sport, that is not the case in England. Football has far outstripped cricket in popularity in its home, but that calls for a wider debate.

Paddles' comment (was on the NZ-England Test thread):-------Martin Crowe is in the first group, but also noted for his cricketing intelligence, trying new things not on a whim, but with careful planning and forethought, innovative. Not noted widely as a man manager, though, as he divided non city folk. Jardine shared this planning and intelligence trait, although took it to deplored by many levels with his ruthlessness.

The quintessential man manager is Mike Brearley, Botham or Gower are quoted as saying he had a degree in people. Many claim he brought the best out of Young Beefy by keeping him happy.

I'm not sure Dhoni belongs in group 1, I think he is more group 2, but you should know Indian cricket better than I do.

Put the Chappell brothers in group 3 too. Lloyd also. And Viv. Steve Waugh too, although he was widely noted as very self average happy and group 1, he viewed sledging as 'mental disintegration'.

AB was group 1 imo. Taylor group 2. Coney group 2 despite his spat with Hadlee. I guess Howarth was group 1.